Thomson v. Her Majesty's Advocate [2005] ScotHC HCJAC_7 (20 January 2005)

Thomson v. Her Majesty's Advocate [2005] ScotHC HCJAC_7 (20 January 2005)

The court held that the Trial Judge properly exercised his discretion in refusing to admit the evidence under section 275, applied the correct legal tests, and that there was no miscarriage of justice.

Citation
[2005] ScotHC HCJAC_7
Parties
Appellant: Thomas Noble Thomson; Respondent: Her Majesty's Advocate
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
20 January 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Following Referral by Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Rape, Fresh Evidence, Section 275 Applications, Credibility of Witness, Miscarriage of Justice
Criminal Law Rape Fresh Evidence Section 275 Applications Credibility of Witness Miscarriage of Justice

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Noble Thomson

Appellant

Her Majesty's Advocate

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Following Referral by Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to allow evidence under section 275 of the 1975 Act constituted a miscarriage of justice
  2. 2 Whether the Trial Judge erred in excluding evidence relating to previous allegations by the complainer

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Trial Judge properly exercised his discretion in refusing to admit the evidence under section 275, applied the correct legal tests, and that there was no miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused